Author Topic: speaking of stating the obvious.  (Read 23446 times)

Offline Regullus

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 526
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #250 on: April 15, 2005, 01:07:08 PM »
@sweeping generalizations about Austria than the US: definitely if they would be based on land mass or ethnic background


 What have you chosen to base your conclusions upon? My point was against sweeping generalizations or perceptions. If I were to categorize Austria simply on my generalized perceptions I might call it a country that loves fine pastries, sausages, beer and coffee, yet I think there is more to the country than that in spite of the possibility that a high percentage of the population may appreciate the above items. If I were to categorize Austria simply on this vague perception, I would be incorrect.

 As to education and specifically addressing stds and contraception, I am all for it, the more the better but there should be a comprehensive approach. After all when addressing the individual, what are you actually addressing? Education must counteract a variety of shaping forces, social mores, cultural standards, family background, religious background, peer pressure, ignorance, cyclical effects, and my favorite group, marketers, not to mention immaturity.

 I agree that it is unlikely that you can stop all adolescents from sexual experimentation but I disagree  that it is wrong to try and discourage behavior. Just as it is unreasonable to expect a large number to practice the six month rule, it is unreasonable to expect a  twelve year old or even a sixteen year old will practice and fully appreciate the reason for safe sex practices. On the bright side teenage pregnancy is down and the majority do use contraceptives. In many ways the larger problem is the stds. While all stds are not life threatening, all have the potential to affect health negatively.

 In short (too late) I agree with you.  :)

Offline jester

  • Here be dragons...
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • If you fail, fail gloriously.
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #251 on: April 15, 2005, 01:44:52 PM »
I am glad we do and the perception that Austria is a country mainly concerned with eating too much of the wrong stuff  is not so far off. :P :D The reason you cannot think of anything else shows the full extend of our relevance on a global scale.

I am glad you did not mention TSOM. Thank you for that.

I would not say that education actually counteracts anything, but should try to complement all the other shaping forces and provide a certain basic level you can assume.
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Why spend all your day surfing for porn?




Balance in all things
I haven't had this much fun since... the last time.

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #252 on: April 16, 2005, 03:30:21 AM »
A 'better late than never' read: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/15/1337232

Amy Goodman interviews War Tax Resister Ruth Benn, Coordinator of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee (http://www.nwtrcc.org/). She is co-author of the book "War Tax Resistance."

Had I known I was going to owe...  >:(

Anyway, carry on.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2005, 03:38:35 AM by Cybersquirt »
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #253 on: April 16, 2005, 03:49:18 AM »
You're citing sources again... The wrath of Regullus will fall upon you... :D

TSOM aren't that horrible neo-nazi group, are they?
If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #254 on: April 16, 2005, 04:25:39 AM »
You're citing sources again... The wrath of Regullus will fall upon you... :D
Hey! 'tis just a link.  You're gonna get me in trouble!  :o
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline jester

  • Here be dragons...
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • If you fail, fail gloriously.
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #255 on: April 16, 2005, 05:10:25 AM »
TSOM = teh scoundrels of Muzak A terrible thing indeed, but not another nazi thing.

The cheap trick that money cannot be earmarked is widely used whenever the citizenry does want hospitals and schools but no fighter jets like in my country. Withholding your tax money for the greater good is not an easy thing to pull off.
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Why spend all your day surfing for porn?




Balance in all things
I haven't had this much fun since... the last time.

Offline Regullus

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 526
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #256 on: April 16, 2005, 07:53:58 AM »
You're citing sources again... The wrath of Regullus will fall upon you... :D
Hey! 'tis just a link.  You're gonna get me in trouble!  :o


 :P

Had I known I was going to owe...  >:(

Anyway, carry on.

 No bragging now. ;)

TSOM = teh scoundrels of Muzak A terrible thing indeed, but not another nazi thing.

The cheap trick that money cannot be earmarked is widely used whenever the citizenry does want hospitals and schools but no fighter jets like in my country. Withholding your tax money for the greater good is not an easy thing to pull off.

 I would never use TSOM against anyone. It just wouldn't be cricket. ;D

 You guys are buying weapons? I thought you had this permenant neutrality thing going on.

 @Eral -  8) ;D


 BTW, HAPPY belated BIRTHDAY CYBER!!!! 8)

 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2005, 08:11:59 AM by Regullus »

Offline jester

  • Here be dragons...
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • If you fail, fail gloriously.
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #257 on: April 16, 2005, 10:57:30 AM »
@ permanent neutrality thing:

Technically yes, but whenever NATO planes bring supplies from Germany to Italy they fly over Austria which is why we NEED fghter jets to hinder that intrusion. Basically all they do is get up there and take a picture and we send a diplomatic note to whoever is trespassing. It costs a fortune and most of the time when they get there the planes are almost gone. It is as pathetic as it sounds, but don't start laughing just yet as it costs a fortune  to the taxpayer and now we are buying tactical midrange fighter too. What a waste. Me very angry and Costa Rica looks nicer every day.

Active neutrality would not mean to sit on the fence and behave like stupid self-centered maggots, but to actively engage in world affairs where others with vested interests could not dare to get involved.

And thank you for being so kind in the choice of your weapons. :D ;)
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Why spend all your day surfing for porn?




Balance in all things
I haven't had this much fun since... the last time.

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #258 on: April 18, 2005, 04:19:08 AM »
(thanks Regullus.  :))
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #259 on: April 23, 2005, 12:07:37 AM »
A clarification:  I finally realize that, in my zealousness, I forgot to mention that one of my previous posts was quoting the Declaration of Independance (in case you didn't recognize it) but using the word Constitution.  The word Declaration should have been used in place of it.  I don't know what else to say, except: My bad. 

 :-\


Here's the pinacle of my friday: http://coloradoaim.org/wardpetition.htm

If you know nothing about Ward Churchill, I encourage you to do some looking.
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline Hendryk

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 138
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #260 on: April 23, 2005, 01:35:48 AM »
How nice.  Here I thought the Right had a copywrite on malignant gibberish as a mode of public discourse and you've proven me quite wrong there.  Thank you for that information.

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #261 on: April 23, 2005, 03:23:53 AM »
Opinions are dangerous things, aren't they.
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline Eral

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #262 on: April 23, 2005, 03:52:03 AM »
Hendryk, I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. That you feel the beliefs stated in the petition are meant to sway public opinion in order to further a hidden agenda? That the beliefs are not stated coherently? 
If you see anything mysterious or unusual, just enjoy it while you can.  - Michael Leunig.

Offline Hendryk

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 138
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #263 on: April 23, 2005, 04:25:03 AM »
I doubt the petitioners are hiding anything.  Unless, of course, they are the front for a sting operation by the FBI.  No, my original post was a reaction to the experience of having read the piece that caused the whole fuss to begin with. 

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #264 on: April 23, 2005, 05:49:30 AM »
A sting operation you say?  All the more reason to stand and be counted, I say.

The Lefts malignant gibberish is called a conspiracy theory.
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline Reverendratbastard

  • Perfunctory Psychopomp
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • "to keep my metaphysics warm" -T.S.Eliot
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #265 on: May 28, 2005, 05:45:15 PM »

  I can't imagine being in the FBI - AIM shootout in the '70s ['70?] (on the AIM side, and with subsequent on-and-off brouhaha) and not sounding malignant in just about any context that includes mention of the United States.

  hendryk, as an aside of sorts, do you think people with better-than-average access to mass communication have an obligation to explain all details leading up to their latest release, or that the consumers of their material have a greater obligation to make their own background checks?  or something else entirely?  i can certainly understand if you don't 'believe' in obligation, or rather that it by nature or of necessity carries any notable weight...
  that more-or-less-aside, the only thing i see as being 'gibberish' (and opening up a whole other Con of worms) is how he refers to who was populating the twin towers....  Greg Palast is more precise in describing some of the offices and their holders lost to the attack, which frankly increases the notional credulty of far-right/high-echelon knowledge/complicity with 9/11.  when 'the best democracy money can buy' is returned to me i'll quote a touch to that effect, although some of it might already be on palast's website which i haven't time to check today...
 
  our government certainly doesn't feel the need to be as subtle with treaty violations as they are with infringements on life/lib/pursuit&al. that rather more directly affect us whiteyz.  [churchill's essay on the utter toothlessness of nonviolent protest is the only intelligent argument i've come across in favor of any level of the 'right to bear arms', btw]  cybersquirt's 'stand and be counted' remark resonates again - what's worse, the right doing their homework and being subtle with their propaganda [to the point, say, of skirting outright lies], or an AIM director getting a rise out of people?  either one is ammo or armor for the right's righteousness (the former because accusations of underhandedness are maddeningly difficult, if not impossible, to level, let alone vindicate; the latter because moderates/wishy-washers who decide against that oh-so-gauche angry attitude slip farther towards the right's more 'reasonable' clutches...)  i'm sure you'd have a hard time claiming churchill hasn't done his homework, outside of his presumptions about the generalized focus/purpose of WTC 'inhabitants'...
 
  while i am usually impressed by prof.Churchill's scholarship ('A Little Matter of Genocide' is 'fun' [read: infuriating, no matter who you choose to believe] history if you can find a copy), Vine Deloria, Jr. is a better writer in general ('God Is Red' and 'Custer Died For Your Sins' in particular), with, imo, more variety of compelling themes (and takes the time to point out Immanuel Velikovsky's "absurd" theories and suggestions - which five decades later [actually, more like three decades at the writing of G.I.R.] have become more plausible than most-if-not-all of the arguments against them (scientific explanations of biblical events and the importance of interdisciplinary study being standouts).  and for the realm of the more exact, deloria co-wrote 'Tribes, Treaties and Constitutional Tribulations' for the more-detail-but-relatively-short-read-minded...


  perhaps this post was all over the place, but . . . ::)
the lord of murder shall perish, yadda yadda yadda.

Aristothenes

  • Guest
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #266 on: May 29, 2005, 01:49:59 AM »
Opinion: Maybe if you guys voted for Nader things would have been different. After all, Democrats and Republicans are just 2 sides of the same coin...
Flame away!

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #267 on: May 31, 2005, 06:28:43 AM »
No.  No flames from me - but it is why I tried to keep opinion out of this thread.

this goes beyond electing Nader or Gore or ..whats-his-name, the other white meat (Kerry, a whisper in the hurricane - just as much an idiot sell-out as Bush).  After hearing most of the other white meats words, I wouldn't even call him the other side.

And, in more recent news, I don't even want to think about the way they "saved" the filibuster.   >:(

Do y'all realize the Republicans filibustered SIXTY of Clinton's nominees?  It's good to be the ones with power, hmm?  Guess that'll show the dem's not to try and stop a few radicals nominees.

(gROWL)
« Last Edit: May 31, 2005, 06:31:26 AM by Cybersquirt »
Stupid is as stupid does.

Offline Cybersquirt

  • Socialist Evil-Doer
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
  • Gender: Female
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #268 on: June 13, 2005, 06:56:42 AM »
Quote
If we can reach 500,000 signatures today we can bring this scandal to light while the story is still hot. Please add your voice today:

http://www.moveonpac.org/tellthetruth/?id=5653-3913396-UG.q1Y9tqe9E20YuxYwU4A&t=3

The smoking gun memo quotes high level British officials during a July 23rd, 2002 cabinet meeting, discussing recent conversations with the Bush Administration on their decision to invade Iraq and the manipulation of intelligence to back it up. Below are two key excerpts:

Sir Richard Dearlove, Director of the British foreign intelligence service, (MI6) reported on his recent meetings in Washington:

Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.[1]
Later British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw added:

It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.[2]
The British government has not disputed the authenticity or accuracy of the smoking gun memo, even in the few crucial days after the story broke before Tony Blair's re-election.[3]

What the Bush administration told these foreign officials is the exact opposite of what the President repeatedly told Congress and the American people about his decision before the invasion, and what he continues to claim - that he was trying to avoid a war America did not want, and that intelligence about the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction was clear and compelling.[4]

Why is it important to confront the Bush administration now and get this story out?

The Bush administration continues to peddle falsehoods about the rush to war and intelligence manipulation, despite overwhelming evidence from former administration officials, and now our closest allies. Two weeks ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told troops stationed in Iraq: "This war came to us, not the other way around."[5] And just yesterday Bush avoided a direct question about the Downing Street Memo by simply reiterating his claim that the war was a choice of last resort.[6]

We must make it clear that lying to the people and our representatives about the life and death choices we face must not go unaddressed. Democracy cannot function without truth from our leaders, and it's time for the deception to end.

With limited news coverage and an administration completely dismissive of any evidence it doesn't like, exposing the truth can feel like a daunting challenge. But we've been here before. Many of us joined MoveOn at a time when the White House and the press didn't believe there could be any real opposition to the President's war, and it took millions of us working together to prove them wrong. That time has come again.

Please help take the first crucial step by helping Representative Conyers directly confront President Bush with signatures and comments from 500,000 Americans demanding a real response to the Downing Street Memo—and the truth about the war.

Please sign today:

http://www.moveonpac.org/tellthetruth/?id=5653-3913396-UG.q1Y9tqe9E20YuxYwU4A&t=4

Thanks for all that you do.

–Ben, Adam, Jennifer, Eli and the MoveOn PAC Team
  Thursday, June 9, 2005

Notes:

For more information about the Downing Street Memo, including the full text, visit http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

To read the full text of Representative Conyers' sign on letter, go to: http://www.moveonpac.org/tellthetruth/conyersletter.html?id=5653-3913396-UG.q1Y9tqe9E20YuxYwU4A&t=5


[1] The Downing Street Memo, http://www.moveon.org/r?r=741

[2] The Downing Street Memo, http://www.moveon.org/r?r=741

[3] CNN, Bush asked to explain UK War Memo May 12, 2005 http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/britain.war.memo/

[4] There are dozens of quotes by Bush and senior administration officials containing false claims about invasion plans and WMD's compiled by the Center for American Progress, and searchable here: http://www.claimvfact.com/

Here are just a few directly from the President and the White House official statements, made before the war and after the time of the Downing Street Memo:

"Of course, I haven't made up my mind we're going to war with Iraq." [10/1/02]
"Hopefully, we can do this peacefully—don't get me wrong. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there's a chance he may decide to do that. And war is not my first choice, don't—it's my last choice." [11/7/02]
"This is our attempt to work with the world community to create peace. And the best way for peace is for Mr. Saddam Hussein to disarm. It's up to him to make his decision." [12/4/02]
"The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons...And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes." [9/26/2002]
"I expected to find the weapons [because] I based my decision on the best intelligence possible...The evidence I had was the best possible evidence that he had a weapon. [2/8/2004]
[5] CNN, "Rice makes surprise visit to Iraq" May 15, 2005 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=739

[6] New York Times, "Bush and Blair Deny 'Fixed' Iraq Reports" June 8th 2005 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=740

 

PAID FOR BY MOVEON PAC
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

and then
Quote
One of the other ways we can make a difference on this crucial issue is to contact the national media and demand further coverage of this scandal. While foreign journalists have given the memo wide exposure, American media remains eerily quiet. The national TV network news shows in particular have failed to investigate the memo [1].

However, this is a problem we can help to solve. Readers of the New York Times recently demanded coverage of the British memo, and the newspaper finally wrote a full story [2]. We can do the same for network news.

Please call or email the nightly news programs you watch, at:

ABC World News Tonight
Phone: 212-456-4040
netaudr@abc.com

CBS Evening News
Phone: 212-975-3691
evening@cbsnews.com

NBC Nightly News
Phone: 212-664-4971
nightly@nbc.com

PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer
Phone: 703-739-5000
newshour@pbs.org

Identify yourself as a viewer, then say something like:
"Please investigate and report on the British 'Downing St. Memo' suggesting the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to support its longstanding plans to invade Iraq. We need to know what really happened. Thank you for your time."
It's important to track our impact. Please let us know you're calling at:

http://www.moveonpac.org/britishmemo.html?id=-3913396-FTBMtBHf.DXeXU6_BXPzNA&t=1

The American media's failure to question the Bush administration led to an unnecessary war. Now the media's failure to cover the war is making it impossible for Americans to unite behind an exit plan. This won't get better until we demand more coverage of the war.

Thank you for all that you do,

--Ben, Noah, Wes, Micayla, and the MoveOn PAC Team

Sources:

1. "Network Viewers Still in the Dark on 'Smoking Gun Memo,'" FAIR, May 20, 2005 http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2520

2. "New Public Editor Looks at 'Downing Street Memo' Coverage," New York Times, May 24, 2005 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=734
« Last Edit: June 13, 2005, 07:05:30 AM by Cybersquirt »
Stupid is as stupid does.

Aristothenes

  • Guest
Re: speaking of stating the obvious.
« Reply #269 on: June 13, 2005, 12:25:43 PM »
You've made my point - leaders in todays' world differ by name, not by policy.